Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the former top commander of international forces in Afghanistan, said this week that the United States should bring back the draft if it ever goes to war again.

"I think we ought to have a draft. I think if a nation goes to war, it shouldn't be solely be represented by a professional force, because it gets to be unrepresentative of the population," McChrystal said at a late-night event June 29 at the 2012 Aspen Ideas Festival. "I think if a nation goes to war, every town, every city needs to be at risk. You make that decision and everybody has skin in the game."

He argued that the burdens of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan haven't been properly shared across the U.S. population, and emphasized that the U.S. military could train draftees so that there wouldn't be a loss of effectiveness in the war effort.

"I've enjoyed the benefits of a professional service, but I think we'd be better if we actually went to a draft these days," he said. "There would some loss of professionalism, but for the nation it would be a better course."

The information by state is more useful than the region grouping. WA, OR, AK and HI are all overrepresented individually, then they are thrown in with low ratio CA to make an “underrepresented” Pacific region. Doesn’t make sense.

I agree with both statements.Before you agree..................... go get your thinking cap.

Your idea of national service (in the military) and our federal governments ideas are quite different. The military is letting people go, what do you think they would have all those extra people doing?

106
posted on 07/05/2012 1:59:43 PM PDT
by PeterPrinciple
( (Lord, save me from some conservatives, they don't understand history any better than liberals.))

Remember at the time all the DoD rhetoric about how "boots on the ground" wouldn't be needed since technology was the end all-be all of future warfighting.

And "they" were right when it came to taking down Afghanistan & Iraq. Of course when you end up occupying both countries for ten years, then you run into a real need for the infantry that you don't have.

111
posted on 07/05/2012 2:11:47 PM PDT
by Tallguy
(It's all 'Fun and Games' until somebody loses an eye!)

Why not eight? That way since they are stuck the malcontents among them might decide if they are in for eight they might as well do what the are supposed to do. Four or eight, we would have a big if not necessarily competent military with compulsory service, just like the ChiComs.

Second, I want to be clear that my feeling is that every citizen owes fealty and service (if required) to his NATION, not to his government. I see a distinct difference.

I use to think that way, but not any more. This nation is so fractured now, that there are very large population blocks that couldn't be more separated by culture, ideology, citizen responsibility, and political warfare, that I will never feel like we are one nation ever again. Probably, at least, until I die. Consequently, I think every individual will have to decide whether what they are being asked, is indeed service to the nation, or simply a furtherance of those goals held by the administration at hand. I think what you are referring to, are the days of old where we had at least a few common purposes and goals. Those days are gone, unfortunately.

The people don’t decide if to go to war, power brokers and politicians do. We don’t have elected reprentatives, we elected authorities that are controlled strictly by those with money and power. Don’t believe that? Then watch 25,000 of your fellow citizens write your congresscritter and ask for something...then watch a power broker hand him a $25,000 bribe, I mean, ‘campaign contribution’, at lunch to ignore your demands.

I see it not as war is discussed carefully because everyone has skin in the game during a draft but that if we are an all volunteer force then no one has to enlist when the power brokers demand it. That is the real throttle to war.

119
posted on 07/05/2012 2:41:38 PM PDT
by CodeToad
(uired to vote for a treaty.)

First post to hint at what I think is happening. Military service is a “calling”. Those who answer the call are most unlikely to do anything against their country. Those who are forced to serve, will just do what they are ordered without concern of it's morality or legality.

I have read many times on this forum, that our “all volunteer” force would never fire upon U.S. civilians, nor would they go door to door confiscating legally owned firearms. Do we feel the same level of confidence when the forces in question are conscripted?.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.